Intel Ships First Dual Core Celeron

[Jimmy 2004]

Intel has now begun shipping the first of its low-end dual core processors: the 1.6GHz Celeron E1200. The processor is based on Intel's Core architecture and is manufactured using a 65nm process, with an 800MHz FSB and 512KB L2 cache. Intel's price (when sold in 1,000 unit quantities) is $53, with these CPUs coming into the market just below the 1.6GHz Pentium E2140 CPUs. Newegg.com has given the processor a price tag of $65.99 for the retail version, which is exactly $9 below that of the E2140.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[niko084]

Heh sounds good, should be a nice upgrade for my brothers little 478 P4 3.0 HT....

Doesn't have a ton of money, but I think that might be a good go for a boost.
But may go for the e2140 or even a e4**** anyways.

 

[Richieb0y]

this chip is good for basic stuff atleast all the celerons i owend but duel core cellys i want to know how they perform in games lol

 

[Jimmy 2004]

Heh sounds good, should be a nice upgrade for my brothers little 478 P4 3.0 HT....

Doesn't have a ton of money, but I think that might be a good go for a boost.
But may go for the e2140 or even a e4**** anyways.

Yeah, I'd say spend the extra $9 and get much more L2 cache at least.

 

[niko084]

Yeah, I'd say spend the extra $9 and get much more L2 cache at least.

Thats what I was pushing on him, but being he doesn't play many games anymore he isn't too up on spending money... I was thinking about buying him a e4400 just so I knew he had decent power.

 

[newtekie1]

I don't think this chip is worth the price. With the E2140 only being $9 more, and double the cache, this chips isn't really competitive. I could see if people absolutely wanted to spend as little money as possible on a chip, and still get a decent chip, because they plan to upgrade quickly to a better processor, but other than that, I don't see many people saving that $9.

 

[niko084]

I don't think this chip is worth the price. With the E2140 only being $9 more, and double the cache, this chips isn't really competitive. I could see if people absolutely wanted to spend as little money as possible on a chip, and still get a decent chip, because they plan to upgrade quickly to a better processor, but other than that, I don't see many people saving that $9.

Your probably right but at the OEM chip level for companies like HP, Acer, Compaq, E-Machine this is going to be huge.

 

[newtekie1]

Your probably right but at the OEM chip level for companies like HP, Acer, Compaq, E-Machine this is going to be huge.

Definitely.

 

[suraswami]

Best pricing would be if it is around $45 shipped. Since this thing has less cache may overclock well too. 6GHZ?

 

[niko084]

Best pricing would be if it is around $45 shipped. Since this thing has less cache may overclock well too. 6GHZ?

Wont see it, the single core is about that.

 

[suraswami]

Wont see it, the single core is about that.

Thats true. You know Single cores should be reduced to 20's or even better Buy one dual Core and get a Single core cpu free

You can use the single core for Bios updates or paper weight

I bought my AM2 Single Core A64 3200 brand new for $20 at Frys. I use this as spare CPU.

 

[niko084]

Thats true. You know Single cores should be reduced to 20's or even better Buy one dual Core and get a Single core cpu free

You can use the single core for Bios updates or paper weight

I bought my AM2 Single Core A64 3200 brand new for $20 at Frys. I use this as spare CPU.

Well I can agree with you.... Single cores are dated... Almost everything will use 2 cores now, and its taking over. By the next major release of chips we shouldn't see single cores anymore.

 

[Scrizz]

ehhh too expensive

 

[Kasparz]

Come on! It has been available for sale in Latvia for about a month, and i tested it week ago.
Your news is older than my grandma.

 

[breakfromyou]

Come on! It has been available for sale in Latvia for about a month, and i tested it week ago.
Your news is older than my grandma.

+1

old news!

 

[evil bill]

The processor is based on Intel’s Core architecture and is manufactured using a 65nm process

really? Core, not Core 2?

 

[Ketxxx]

Well I can agree with you.... Single cores are dated... Almost everything will use 2 cores now, and its taking over. By the next major release of chips we shouldn't see single cores anymore.

Single cores have a very practical purpose still - for the business looking to replace the office systems but want to spend an absolute minimum, in which case a single core chip could cost what? £20 each?

 

[jothy]

I agree, too pricey. Things look way better on the AMD side at that price.

 

[newtekie1]

really? Core, not Core 2?

The Core 2s are based on the Core architecture. That is just the generic Intel marketting.

I agree, too pricey. Things look way better on the AMD side at that price.

Agreed, if you aren't overclocking(most low end users don't) AMD has this price range down. A 4200+ can be had for this price.

 

[eidairaman1]

yup and a Core 2 2 line can be had for what that celeron is, such a waste of money when the core 2 2 line and higher are going to be way faster than the celerons anyway.

 

[Crazyhorse]

Ok guys.

A little addon to this topic since i own a Dual Core Celeron E1200.

Let me tell you something about CPU-Z and this CPU.

Intel Celeron E1200 @ 1.6ghz
Revision M0
Codename: Conroe
L2 Cache 512kb

This CPU is a bottleneck for any good Videocard at stock speed.

I benched my HD 2900 Pro 256bit 750/1000 at 1.6ghz


3DMark03 = 29.650
3DMark05 = 8.994
3DMark06 = 6.549

Now since we know its a Conroe Core I did a little bid overclocking. I set the Voltage to about 1.45V with a vdroop to 1.29V use a 400mhz FSB and there we go.

3.2ghz 100% overclock.

Abit QuadGT P965 Chipset
2x1gb Geil Esoteria
HD 2900 Pro
Cooling Coolermaster Aquagate S1

So it was pretty easy, the CPU is not hot at all and i did another 3DMark06 and the score went up like 10.287.

So if you overclock the holy crap out of that CPU you can game just fine with it. Actually i think at 3.2ghz this Celeron kills about any AMD X2 Dual Core.

Highst i got so far was 3.3ghz but i m afraid with my board there is not much more to gain.

 

[eidairaman1]

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_overclocker/page14.html

Read the entire review of those CPUs.

 

[JrRacinFan]

Yes but crazyhorse, what resolution were those 3dmark runs ran at?

 

[newtekie1]

I'm going to guess default resolutions.

 

[JrRacinFan]

Which is what? 1024x768?

How could he state then at that low of a resolution it was holding back the graphics card? I mean most graphics based cpu benches were done at that res or lower.

Now I could see if he ran 1440x900 or higher on all tests and then gave us a difference but I beleive those results are based more towards the cpu in itself. Just my .02.